Abstract [en]

The purpose of this study was to address the evaluation phase within the area of public procurement and more specifically, from a supplier perspective. Public procurement is carried out in order to get good quality at a low price. The procurement can be performed by the lowest price or by the most economically advantageous tender. Previously concluded contracts were requested and the evaluation model that they used was identified and also it’s corresponding mathematical model. The score-weighted models were not consistent because they depended on irrelevant variables, as did the relative quality-weighted model in theory. This means that non-competitive tender affects the outcome of the other tenders. The study showed that it is more beneficial to choose the relative quality-weighted model over the score-weighting model, as it does not suffer from the irrelevant variable situation. The relative quality-weighted model is equivalent to the more superior quality-weighted model with discrete premium/discounts. This is the case as the ranking of the tenderers bids were the same in the two models. Furthermore, it was shown through a sensitivity analysis, that the weighting for the quality and the price from the score-weighted model played no role in the relative quality-weighted model; this is also an advantage as the purchaser often arbitrarily sets it.